4 ms·

That's a quite old (2005) article, dating to the original sars outbreak. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.01.26.919985v1 https://www.biorxiv.org/co

• rolph 7y ago
  That particular preliminary linked to is too new and requires critical interpretation for a number of issues
  • dnautics 7y ago
    > is too new it's on bioarxiv, what exactly does 'too new' mean?
    • rolph 7y ago
      a preliminary submission has not passed a peer review with the rigor of scientific defense. these sorts of things may be passed among researchers for extended periods of time [years] until all the kinks are worked out of the thesis and a working theory with no known exceptions and independently confirmed agreement of results occurs. jan 26 2020 is the submission date.
      • dnautics 7y ago
        What exactly is the standard of peer review you're expecting? Unless you have reason to think they flat out fabricated the data, the analysis is probably no better or worse than your garden variety nature or science or cell paper.